About your Search

20130401
20130430
STATION
CSPAN 36
CSPAN2 29
FBC 19
SFGTV 13
CNBC 6
MSNBCW 5
CNNW 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
LANGUAGE
English 120
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 120 (some duplicates have been removed)
the federal government spends taxpayer dollars. often called the congressional watchdog, the g.a.o. investigates instances of waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government. my committee has direct jurisdiction over the g.a.o. congress must have current information on how federal programs are performing in order to both legislate and conduct meaningful oversight. the improvement act will enhance the g.a.o.'s ability to serve congress primarily by ensuring agencies have access to key data where housed in the expect -- warehoused in the executive branch. this bill ensures the g.a.o. has access to the national directory of new hires, which is used to verify eligibility . r federal programs to detect or prevent fraud, and to identify improper payments. h.r. 1162 will ensure the g.a.o. has the ability to obtain agency records and to administer oaths to witnesses when auditing accounts and investigating fraud. it will allow the controller general to seek judicial remedy tone force joo's right to information -- to enforce joo's right to information -- to enforce g.a.o. rights. the commi
, also like to voice my concern that the last gao meeting was canceled and when i was told the official reason, in my interpretation and opinion, i thought it was very inadequate reason why it was canceled. looking at the agenda, i see item 1 and 2, and i tell myself, ha this committee become a lap dog rather than a watchdog agency. there are plenty of items to discuss in addition to item number 1. i only see one other item, and i also have to consult whether it belongs here or not. so, let's put it this way. either this committee is going to be active and a watchdog or it will continue to be a lap dog and will do a great disservice to law abiding citizens in san francisco. and for the record, so there will be no arguing later on, i find it a very interesting phenomenon that when committee hearings are under observation, that there are so many cancellations all of a sudden and that all of a sudden the number of items have dropped off. so, the only thing i can conclude is what's going on? thank you. >> thank you. any other members of the public? seeing none, public comment is closed. so,
that and one thing i'm curious about is when you see c.b.o. or g.a.o. or some think tank or somebody, whoever it is, that comes out with these studies and these analyses of how we're wasting money, how we can be more efficient, how we can do things better, that really kind of covers the water front, does o.m.b. take those and sort of take those to heart and try to allow those to shape their policy and their priorities and their reform efforts? or does o.m.b. sort of just defer to congress and say, well, congress needs to fix that, that's not our headache? >> the g.a.o. report that came out today will be an important contribution to how o.m.b. thinks about those priorities. and i think the prioritization comes through both conversations and reports, certainly this committee, and actually the chairman and the ranking member have both focused on these issues of waste and those are lists that o.m.b. does think about and consider and whether that's how some of the progress has been made on improper payments, while it's not enough, improper payments have gone from 5 dwp 4% 05 -- 5.4% to 5.35%. ther
question, i believe this committee has been very well served by the efforts of g.a.o. it's really one of the areas of government where we've cut their budget. fiscal conservative would be one of those areas where i'd like to increase the budget. i'd like to get your assessment on that and your level support for the g.a.o. >> i think the g.a.o. is an important for all of us as we try to move to more effective and efficient government. in the report that came out today is something i think we need to take a close look at and work on. i think the administration has in some cases worked on those issues. i know that the congress has as well. but i think g.a.o. is an important partner to have these conversations, looking for those opportunities to make government more effective and efficient. and i welcome that opportunity if confirmed. >> thank you. look forward to seeing you tomorrow. talk about budget. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. >> i greatly enjoyed also our discussion. as you came to my office. and our free-flowing exchange of ideas. and i'm here today kind of ironi
much they're spending on it, which the g.a.o. said one of the reasons they can't estimate the savings more accurately is because the majority of agencies have no idea what they are spending on these programs. the question i have is why not? and if they don't know what they're spending, why aren't we doing something about it? higher education assistance, 21 different programs four different agencies not all in the education department. $174.7 billion a year. that includes pell grants. that includes student loans, the costs associated with student loans, veterans employment training, we have six programs not all run by the veterans department but run by the veterans department and other agencies. we're spending $1.2 billion, and here's what we know. we're running these programs and veterans unemployment, even though they have a skill when they come out of the military, is higher than what the average is in the country. so it's obviously not working. also in the report is something that's very important to me. and let me find it, if i might, for a minute. g.a.o.'s report exposes governme
are the figure. it came from the gao office just last year, seven years after this. with that in mind, recognizing, as u as you point out, may fe tuntil 1 2015 than we are to believe today. have you considered that in your support of the brac? >> i have not seen the actual figures or the study you refer to, senator. i know. ly respond to your question. but i think from i don't know if it was the same gao report or another one, that note order the 2005 brac round in our facility. i'm going ask mr. hale to respond quickly. i know you read the report i refer to. i ask you share that with secretary hagel, which i'm sure you'll want to look at. i would only ask you consider that because those reasons for my opposition to seven years ago, eight years ago now are probably more true today. when the chairman talked about the missile defense thing, i was very pleased when he made the decision to increase back up to 44. on the west coast. automatic the things happening in north korea. i was over there recently i talked to you from other there, and i realized that this is something that is -- we
this committee has been very well served by the efforts of g.a.o. it's really one of the areas of government where we've cut their budget. fiscal conservative would be one of those areas where i'd like to increase the budget. i'd like to get your assessment on that and your level support for the g.a.o. >> i think the g.a.o. is an important for all of us as we try to move to more effective and efficient government. in the report that came out today is something i think we need to take a close look at and work on. i think the administration has in some cases worked on those issues. i know that the congress has as well. but i think g.a.o. is an important partner to have these conversations, looking for those opportunities to make government more effective and efficient. and i welcome that opportunity if confirmed. >> thank you. look forward to seeing you tomorrow. talk about budget. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. >> i greatly enjoyed also our discussion. as you came to my office. and our free-flowing exchange of ideas. and i'm here today kind of ironically in a room that's not
. the gao thinks that could be slimmed down to one catfish inspection program. >> like when my child -- i tell him to do something and he says, it's hard, daddy, i don't want to do, and gives up. this is the part most americans don't understand. >> you have 381 recommendations since 2011 i think. what's the total estimated ballpark figure of savings to the government if all 381 were implemented? >> the estimate is tens of billions of dollars. >> i'm trying to figure out why it took $400,000 to redo the navy uniform when they actually looked like the other. that's -- i'd of done it for a lot less than that. >> we can't afford to continue to operate the way we're operating. and it needs fundamental re-examination. we can do better, and we have to. >> you're right, three different agencies inspecting catfish. 679 overlapping renewable energy programs. seven camouflaged uniforms for the military, all colors and patterns, of course. sound like a waste of your tax dollars? the government accountability office says yes, it is. they say they can save billions, billions with a "b" by cutting waste
in tackling these issues. developed a new website, you can find it at gao.gov, which contains all of the different recommendations we have made in these areas. a member of the public can go on and search by the public and see what type of progress has been made. host: nicole clowers is with the government accountability of this. she is a financial market and community investment director. federal news radio has a story from last week about your most recent report. it says it is the final a three-year study of congress -- a congressionally requested the gao studies. guest: this third report marks the completion of a systematic government that we started three years ago. it was our way to break it up into managing pieces. this year we identified 131 new issues in next to replant to continue to look -- and the next year we plan to continue to look. as i mentioned before, in 2011 and 2012 at the five almost 300 actions that congress or the executive branch agencies could take to help identify and address this duplication or fragmentation. what we found is that almost 80% of those acti
of money to cut this instead of talking about these very important functions. gerri: to gao came out with a report. let me show you some of the other ways in the justice department. tom, i know you're already familiar with this. fifty-six of the dot grants are more than 20% of grant funds for victim assistance and related research. so money that is spent, and also duplicated, nobody is paying attention. how is this possible, and why does this continue, particularly when we are facing such a huge deficit and are spending debt is $63. >> $33 billion since 2005. a lot of money. of course, the overlap is obvious when you have 56 programs for victims assistance. the justice department claims they were all a little bit different. the gao issued a report in july of last year. updated at it just this week. they said the justice department has started to look at us. gerri: starting to look at it -- it's their department. normal organization would tolerate this duplication. tom, thank you for coming in tonight. an important story, i'm so glad we told people about it. gerri: now we want to know
, dhs is used apprehensions on the southwest border as an interim: escher. however, gao previously testified this measure does not inform program results and therefore limits dhs and congressional oversight and accountability. my question to you is i agree with you apprehensions are not the only measurement. we have no other measurement rate now. incredibly the testimony before the house, mr. bartkowski, representative kenneth miller that will be a tool for the measurement you are suggesting. when are we going to have these measurement of effectiveness as the government accountability office says we need. if you don't believe believe apprehensions ideas here, what is the answer? we have right now at our disposal in order for congress to make a judgment. >> thank you, senator. i will does two things in particular. versus the effectiveness ratio. one of the things important if we want to know too that technology and observation how many people come across the border and how many people do we apprehend or turn that? that allows us to understand -- >> each of the metrics and standards
of this story comes at the same time the government accountability office the gao here in washington released a new report on what's called the political intelligence industry and it's those firms that mine washington agencies, congress, all of the federal government apparatus here for details that they can then feed to traders on wall street to get ahead of the announcements of major information. let me bring the highlights. gao finding that no laws or ethics rules specifically govern the sale of information by these political intelligence firms but they also said the disclosure of material nonpublic governmental information could be insider trading and they said members of congress could use the speech or debate privilege of the united states constitution as a defense here. now the story that was broken in the "wall street journal" this morning was of a firm called height securities which got information in advance in a change of medicare payment policy on monday, released that information to its clients monday before the close of trading and you just saw the chart there. a lot of activity
. the thing that is really crazy, most of what was exposed today by the gao, a branch of congress, in fact was, were things that are completely within the administration's control. they can work smarter. the office of management and budget exists to prevent this kind of duplication. they're just not doing their jobs. neil: i was going down the list, congressman, of some of the things going on. individually, a lot of these projects aren't bad. duplicated dozens of times among dozens of agencies it starts getting bad. >> oh absolutely. neil: who is in charge of that? is that a gsa thing? is that within the office of management and budget at the white house? is that cbo thing? who? >> basically 23 different cabinet levels have 35 offices and 80 programs out of just 35 offices on renewables. gsa is one of them of course. one of the problems everybody wants to be good and green and renewable but you end up with 35 offices headed by $35200,000 people. you end up with all this redundancy. this is part of the gao, the gao is not going to make a decision whether renewables are good, whether solar energ
and the departmental data coordinators. >> president chiu? >> thank you, mr. chair. colleagues, i want to thank the gao committee for their recommendation of this item and appreciate your consideration. three years ago i was happy to work with mayor newsome to pass our city's first open data ordinance and at that point we were a national leader in the open data movement. unfortunately we have fallen a bit behind. at this time we have about 500 city maintained data sets, but there are literally thousands of data sets that we could put out to the public. we have known in recent years that the release of government data and improved partnership between government and citizens has led to many successes at improving government. we know this is good for open government. this is to help provide more information to the press, to the public, and really ensure that as we analyze our government data, this is leading to innovations throughout our communities. i want to just take a moment because some of our colleagues have asked me, what type of data are we talking about? let me give three examples of things that
be happening within the next weeks and months. we think that is the best option. the gao has provided some useful recommendations for how we should continue working with the few servicers that were not part of the recent settlement and we will take those recommendations. >> if i could translate that e,to journal ease -- journalez if you knew then what you knew now, you would have done it differently. >> absolutely. >> what would you have done differently, do you think? i am not eating to trap you. -- meaning to trap you. promised i would be polite. >> perhaps we would have taken an approach of a similar -- simple or categorization. and sending payments more rapidly, getting involved in detailed reviews. >> or money, less process. >> right. the money that had been agreed on was being eaten up i very costly reviews and spending money for consultants. ,hese turned out to be commonly a file might be 2000 pages or more. 10 or 20 orld take 50 hours of a single file. that turned out not to be a workable approach. >> ok. let it go. are there any other questions, good luck. one thing, before i go
with what the gao has done of the past four years? we're looking at duplication and much of. >> the have not finished the government. each of your agencies are in there. is where we agree with them. here's where we disagree. here are the things we think they have made better positive. here are the things we do not think are a waste of our time. not a good expenditure. if you would do this for me, that put a check for me back on gao. the are not always right. i learn, i think this would prove very beneficial. job is to help you. it is not just to be critical. effectively are we doing this? can we make any difference on this committee in terms of streamlining back, making the more efficient that i will submit some questions for the records. thank you. ask you raiseo your hand or night. do you think the border is far more secure than it was half a year ago? how many think we can do a whole lot more to improve? how many think we can do a good deal more? it is different than a whole lot. a whole lot is a whole lot. senator cobra and i were once on a hearing in the finance committee. you're ta
. the gao identifying 162 areas of duplication in federal programs by the government, starting with the one we've all been talking about today, three programs that inspect catfish. one at the department of agriculture that costs 14 million bucks a year. the food and drug administration, national marine fishery service. the gao also goes after the pentagon for wasting money on producing uniforms for the military, for soldiers and storing them. $82 million a year could be saved with changes there. on renewable energy, there are 80 different wind programs run by 35 offices at eight agencies costing $5 billion according to the gao. well the chairman of the government reform committee says, acknowledges all these kinds of programs have been approved by democrats and republicans in washington over the years. so it is not a traditionally partisan problem. take a listen. >> it's partisan only in the sense it is the bureaucracy against the american people. it is fiefdoms within government against any kind of real reform. remember, for each of these grants there's a recipient. for each of these progr
ought to embrace the enumerated power. the g.a.o. for the last three years has shown us where $250 billion a year in waste is, and yet the congress has done nothing on it. senator feinstein and i eliminated $6 billion a year in terms of the ethanol blender's credit. that's the only thing that's gone through in three years that even comes close to addressing what the g.a.o. has recommended. out of $250 billion. so you can understand why people might be cynical of washington, is because we don't have our nose pointed in the right direction. we continue to pass laws that ignore the enumerated powers. and one of the results of that is, is $250 billion worth of duplicative programs which have no true metrics on them. if they were all working, that would be fine. but in fact, most aren't. and so i think it needs to be ko*urpbted that there's a lot of disparate views in our country, but the motivation behind it is really love of country. whether you're on the hard left or the hard right, it's just a different path. and to compare that group of people to anarchists is both insensitive, ina
you. fox has obtained the results of a new gao report duplication or wasteful spending adding almost $100 billion a year on top of a larger amount from two previous reports. renewable energy programs topped them all with 679 overlapping programs. senator tom coburn says the federal government could save $2.2 trillion with a t over 10 years if congress and the administration worked at it. >> less than 10 or 11% of the stuff that's been identified beforehand has been addressed. so 90%, 88% has not been address dollars. -- addressed. none of the big savings has been addressed. >> bret: the president is working a full-court press on capitol hill this week. pushing hard on three major agenda items. chief white house correspondent ed henry tells us where we are on each one. >> one day before he unveils his new budget with cuts to social security. president obama faced more anger from his liberal allies. [chanting] >> no chained cpi. >> protest over chained cpi cuts to government benefits sparked protests outside the white house led by liberal groups including now and moveon.org. >> real de
for the gao to study whether or not there really is a problem. well, the report, a gao report finally came out that shows that there is, indeed, a problem because they could not even identify who these political intelligence consultants are or how big it is. and as a result, we're going to see a new effort in congress led by senator charles grassley. gerri: of former aide is right at the center of this, right? >> and, yes. it highlights a lot of things, including the fact that lobbying firms don't like it when the lobbyists go ahead and use their lobbying information to sell to these political intelligence firms. for me what it highlights is, this is what happens when government is regulating in subsidizing everybody so much. increasingly the placement of a, in legislation, the decision of a committee chairman, the decision of a bureaucrat, the timing of a rule, that step is worth millions and becomes worth more and more as government increases the act of subsidizing and regulating industry. gerri: i want to give you a quick follow-up. i know you know the folks involved. grassley has been deny
do know and i will respond to your question but i think from the same gao report or another one noted in the 2005 brac round it clearly reflected i think the number was almost a 25% over capacity and infrastructure at the time in our facility. now, i will ask mr. hale to respond here quickly but to answer your question we have looked at all the factors, upfront costs. >> we don't need to hear from mr. hale now but if you will for the record secretary hale i know you have read the report i referred to and i ask that you would share that with secretary hagel which i'm sure he will want to look at and i would ask you to consider that because i think those reasons for my opposition to -- 8 years ago now are probably more true today. the chairman talked about the missile defense thing. i was very pleased when you made the decision to increase the number of ground-based interceptor sites on the west coast. i think that was good. what i don't agree with as has been pointed out that is probably a good thing to do in light of all the things happening in north korea. i was over there recently a
'm saying. i'm not against fusion centers but we -- what the gao report said this year if there is hunt of duplication going on -- there is tons of duplication going on that the taxpayer is paying for. have you read the report? what areas are you taking to address to location in your department? but i have asked our management team to look at all the areas that gao identified and give me their assessment as to whether the gao was correct. as i indicated, by the time a gao is written sometimes you do not have the most current information. under these budget times, we have no interest in wasting any taxpayer dollars. f i can find a redundancy or something that can be done efficiently, that is what our efficiency review process is all about. we are going to do that. >> when you see an area that needs our help, you guys got is doing three different things in three different areas that lead to the same results. here is a recommendation. why don't you guys change this? i would like that you be forward with us when you look at all that that the gao has put out and say congress, you have to cha
and we are putting together a number of issues. gao has previously highlighted and continues to highlight problems across the government. you probably have heard a lot of these issues in the press. seeing say that we are progress. these reports bring increased attention to these issues. one thing we do is track the extent which government agencies take on the issues we identified. over the last three years identified 380 actions or recommendations that we want the congress or executive branch to take on to address issues that we have found. we are finding that they are making progress in tackling these issues. we have developed a new website, you can find it at gao.gov, which contains all of the different recommendations we have made in these areas. a member of the public can go on and search by the public and see what type of progress has been made. host: nicole clowers is with the government accountability of this. she is a financial market andthe community investment director. federal news radio has a story from last week about your most recent report. it says it is the final chapter i
the postmaster general has failed to propose changes, not because the gao will not testify these changes are material and not because the cbo has failed to score what these savings will be. not because some of those savings have been statutory lee possible since the 70's. not because the american people failed to support these meaningful changes by the clear majorities of each category, and i want to reiterate the majority of americans see this as not essentials. the majority of americans are perfectly happy going to a cluster box, a corner box or lock box near their home to get their mail some of them get it in the shade of a greater cost oflabor by far. it isonderful and convenient t ly post office. again and again the legislature is heralded buy almost every newspaper in america. it is supported by the business community. but behind the scenes, lobbying continues to make it impossible. recently the postmaster announced that he would in fact to go to a new that would provide different service. legal opinions varied but he certainly had a right to try to be challenged. he had other aven
, does not always work out. the gao says that if you spend $1, you get that $69. why don't you just give them $1 trillion and then we can go home? it does not quite work that way. the acting commissioner would say, it does not always work that way. >> that is right. in general, and these numbers are based on history, is four to one in terms of the money that we get back. what the chairman says is right. if you give us money this year, it is unlikely to have an immediate impact. actually, it might erode the love it because we have to hire and train, and that takes people off of revenue generation. it is always a lagging impact. in budgetreduction has a leg impact. we are doing fewer exams as we speak and those closures will not occur this year necessarily. they may occur next year. sequestration will not be an immediate hit on our numbers, it will tail out in 14 and become much more evident than. >> mr. chairman, to your point and to the gentleman's questions, they are absolutely fair. extent that you can move towards understanding what those numbers are certainly helps us with appropriat
is too much, but when the gao did a study, they believe it's going to cost $3.2 billion. this has been going on for quite some time. in fact, for several years now, i've been fighting the issue with the gsa and federal judiciary. the federal judges are in working with the gsa to develop the courthouses. they overbuild them. they use numbers projecting out numbers of judges in the courthouse that never come to fruition when they finally build these things. we overbuilt courthouse, and they are always over budget, so we're pressing hard to save taxpayer dollars. >> how is it possible you go from a billion dollar estimate for courthouse construction to short period of time. how did that happen? >> well, the gao looked at the way the white courthouses have n developed in gsa and the federal court finding over the years there's things they underestimate significantly so when the time comes to build these things and when they are built, they go way overbudget. the gao looked on criteria of 33 past courthouses, in fact, over ten years that have. built, and they found these cost overruns run r
like to mention why doesn't gao committee on thursday have on its schedule a discussion about mr. henry alvarez? and i think the mayor should donate his retirement check to the people that live in the projects. thank you. >> thanks. next speaker. >>> mr. president, board of supervisors, my name is [speaker not understood], i live in the north of market. i just heard on the conservative radio that the blue angels were canceled. i know this body some years ago had a pretty significant discussion about the safety issues involving the blue angels, and it occurred to me that over and above that, if we're in a government that is not being sufficiently funded and people are cutting corners, you know, safety could be an issue in a program where safety is really critical. and i know it's potentially a big hit to our city particularly the marin a district, but, you know, if you're cutting corners and you can't account for safety, then there's other kind of programs that actually should get cut. thank you. ~ marina >> thank you very much. are there any other members of the public that wish to spea
by those organizations. if you want to delve into this, do a google search for the f-35 and gao. up for you?a follow- >> i am looking at some other military budget issues. portionense an enormous of our overall federal budget. it is important to look at some of the trade-offs. as we go forward, what can we afford? what is important for national defense? what are the sorts of things we waste money on? >> there were you writing for? to them?ou appeal >> i tried to make the plane the central character. stories about military procurement, budget issues, they are complex, hard to understand, filled with jargon. i tried to step back and say, hocawayel i th will be eag people? the way to do this would be to focus on the plane itself. e got out.ks you'v thank you very much for joining us. >> great to talk to you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> 48 dvd copy, -- for a dvd copy, call this number. to give us your comments about this program, visit us at qanda.org. >> a funeral service for margaret thatcher. a look at th
and gao. >> what is a follow-up for you? >> i am looking at some other military budget issues. it is important to look at some of the trade-offs. as we go forward, what can we afford? what is important for national defense? what are the sorts of things we waste money on? >> who were you writing for? how did you appeal to them? >> i tried to make the plane the central character. stories about military procurement, budget issues, they are complex, hard to understand, filled with jargon. i tried to step back and say, how can i tell this in a way that will be engaging to people? the way to do this would be to focus on the plane itself. >> two books you've got out. thank you very much for joining us. >> great to talk to you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> for a dvd copy of this program, call 1-877-662-7726. to give us your comments about this program, visit us at qanda.org. as rams are also available c-span podcasts. >> next, the funeral service for former prime minister margaret thatcher. then i l
information from multiple sources. >> guest: i mean, there's several. gao is certai one the comptroller of the currency, you know, whoever the president happens to be, you know, those numbers are will. are there. the u.s. budget is online, i think, through numerous sites from the white house. and i suppose being a conspiracy theorist, you'd think they're manipulating the budget. those reports are very voluminous. >> host: you really have to kind of of of learn to -- >> guest: you have to look at, you have to look at. it takes time. there's no shortcuts. it's not exciting work. and people are always saying, asking us have you ever been threatened? we've never been threatened sitting at a library table looking at this kind of data. but that's what the heart of the work is. it just takes a long time to systematically go through that. but it's open in a way that was much more difficult a few years ago. of. >> host: you're actually, with your questions, putting your finger on what is a really critical problem that goes unmentioned. and that's the news media. and especially now when the news
? >> avenue where she gets her information the gao said only 6 percent of the borders have full control only 20% under operational control that is less than half with a failing grade and as far as the triggers is a hope and wish if not done within five yearsrs there is another commission so it is amnesty fortand border security later, if ever. lou: in sure the temperature you have taken. is it likely? you have your own gang of 8. you are working on this issue but the first words are they love what the gang of 8 has done. will we watch this get rubber-stamp? >> not all. i do not think the senate immigration bill as it now stands will pass the senate. as far as what is going on they have not made pants -- plans public. we will pass the guest worker plan and a bill for more immigrants to need the skills they need to get jobs and take care of their families. to pass that you verify bill to make sure workers who hire those here illegally and we will do it right on the house judiciary committee that is a direction you'll see congress go. lou: always good to talk with you. good to be here. make you
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 120 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)